ERIC EJ1016512: The Universality of Good Teaching: A Study of Descriptors across Disciplines

2013·0.22 MB·English

by  ERIC

International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 2013, Volume 25, Number 2, 176-188

http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/ ISSN 1812-9129

The Universality of Good Teaching: A Study of
Descriptors Across Disciplines

Jerry W. Samples Susan E. Copeland
University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown Clayton State University

The literature on teaching is replete with definitions and examples of good teaching. They include
the traits and characteristics of the best instructors, teachers, and professors. In recent years, the
literature included the impact of teaching on the student learner, thus coming full circle, from teacher
to learner. The literature provides good information, but it is the experience of one’s peers that
provides reliable and current information. Since 1998, over 1000 faculty, mostly engineering faculty,
have considered 5 questions concerning good teaching. They have pair-shared the results, and those
results have accumulated. Collectively they have defined good teaching: the methods, the results and
measures, and the need for good teaching to ensure that classes and courses are successful. They
have even discussed the definition and meaning of “successful.” They have assigned adjectives and
phrases as exemplars for the best practices of instructors/teachers/professors. In 2006, in discussions
with colleagues at a teaching and learning conference, the question arose about the possibility that all
teachers think approximately the same way about teaching. In response to these musings researchers
conducted a survey of a non-engineering comparison group of faculty from two liberal arts related
institutions who were asked to comment on the same five questions concerning good teaching: 66
responses were obtained, and their results are listed and compared below. This paper presents the
results of the discussions and the survey on good teaching. It ties the results of faculty discussions
and the survey with the literature and the voices of students who have discussed good teaching with
educational psychologists. It shows that the fundamentals of good teaching are simple and attainable
by every faculty member, and it frames a few of the most important traits and characteristics that the
best instructors, teachers, and professors possess.

Hypothesis demanding and important as their research and
scholarship” (Bain, 2004, p. 17).
If teaching is a universal activity, then it should be 3. “Simply put, the best teachers expect ‘more’
regarded in the same light, using the same descriptors [of their students]” (Bain, 2004, p. 17).
regardless of the academic discipline of the faculty 4. “While methods vary, the best teachers often
member. try to create what we have come to call a
‘natural critical thinking environment.’ In that
Literature Review environment, people learn by confronting
intriguing, beautiful, or important problems,
Researchers in higher education have explored authentic tasks that will challenge them to
definitions and examples of good teaching for decades grapple with ideas, rethink their assumptions,
(e.g., Brawner, Felder, Allen, & Brent, 2002; Elbow, and examine their mental models of reality”
1986; Estes & Ressler, 2003; Gaonker, 2003; Lowman, (Bain, 2004, p. 18).
1995; McKeachie, 1999; Postelthwait, 1972; 5. “Highly effective teachers tend to reflect a
Ramaekers, van Keulen, Kremer, Pilot, & van strong trust in students” (Bain, 2004, p. 18).
Beukelen, 2011; Skilling, 1969; Wankat & Oreovicz, 6. “All the teachers we studied have some
1993), and their work has included the traits and systematic program—some more elaborate than
characteristics of the best instructors. One recent and others—to assess their own efforts and to make
extensive study entitled What the Best College appropriate changes” (Bain, 2004, p. 19).
Teachers Do (Bain 2004) provides clear evidence of the
characteristics of the most effective college professors Bain’s (2004) study supports concepts in an earlier
and their effects on student learning, especially on analysis by Lowman (1995), who begins Mastering the
“deep” learning (Bain, 2004, p. 27). The major Techniques of Teaching with a chapter on exemplary
conclusions of this study are the following: teaching. He categorizes teaching as a two-dimensional
model with the first dimension being intellectual
1. “Without exception, outstanding teachers know excitement and second dimension dealing with
their subjects extremely well” (Bain, 2004, p. 15). interpersonal rapport. Intellectual excitement can be
2. “Exceptional teachers treat their lectures, divided into two components: “the clarity of the
discussion sessions, problem-based sessions, instructor’s presentations and their stimulating
and other elements of teaching as serious emotional impact on students” (Lowman, 1995, p. 21).
intellectual endeavors as intellectually Thus, good presentations engage the students, resulting
Samples and Copeland The Universality of Good Teaching 177

in attention without distraction. Interpersonal rapport good teaching with a greater focus on engineering
“deals with an instructor’s awareness of these faculty. Wankat and Oreovicz (1993), commenting on
[classroom] interpersonal phenomena and with his or good teaching, use some of the same overlapping
her skill as [sic] communicating with students in ways descriptors including: “stimulating, clear, well-
that increase motivation, enjoyment, and independent organized, warm, approachable, prepared, helpful,
learning” (Lowman, 1995, p. 27). There are two keys: enthusiastic and fair” (p. 4). They also agree with
“avoid stimulating negative emotions” and “promote Lowman’s (1995) two-dimensional model, further
positive emotions” (Lowman, 1995, p. 21). In addition adding Elbow’s (1986) observation: “The most
to the two-dimensional model, Lowman’s (1995) important dimension is intellectual excitement which
research produced results with regard to the teacher’s represents the teacher’s obligation to knowledge and
commitment to his or her profession as well as general society” (p. 142). Further they state, “Included in
descriptors of good teachers. intellectual excitement are organization and clarity of
Lowman’s (1995) model grew from an analysis of presentation of up-to-date material. Since dull
over 500 teaching award nomination forms submitted performance can decrease the excitement of the most
predominantly (80%) by students. The analysis resulted interesting material, this dimension includes
in descriptors that applied to the model. Table 1 appears performance characteristics” (Wankat & Oreovicz,
in Lowman’s (1995) book: note that only descriptors 1993, p. 142). In a series of questions that follow this
mentioned more than 10 times were included. comment, they highlight performance characteristics
This study provides a range of descriptors that are that include: energy, enthusiasm, love of material, clear
resultant and reflective of Bain’s (2004) study: and articulate language, and active engagement of
Dimension I is directly tied to findings 1, 2, 4, and 6 of students.
Bain’s study—knowledge, delivery, production of a Concerning interpersonal rapport, Wankat and
“natural critical thinking environment”—while Oreovicz (1993) evoke Elbow’s (1986)claim that it “is
Dimension II is integrally related to findings 3 and 5— the teacher’s obligation to the students” (p. 142). They
high expectations and trust that students can achieve further discuss the notion that engineering professors do
them. The general descriptors are directly reflected in not necessarily agree that interpersonal rapport is
Bain’s (2004) research as well as our own. important; however, “students consistently include this
In another analysis, Wankat and Oreovicz (1993) dimension in their ratings of teachers” (p. 4). So,
in Teaching Engineering discuss the components of whether one believes in it or not, interpersonal rapport

Table 1
Descriptors Associated with the Enhanced Two-Dimensional Model of Effective College Teaching
Dimension Adjective Appearances Adjective Appearances
Dimension I: Intellectual Excitement Enthusiastic 68 Engaging 18
Knowledgeable 45 Prepared 16
Inspiring 43 Energetic 15
Humorous 34 Fun 13
Interesting 31 Stimulating 13
Clear 25 Creative 12
Organized 22 Lectures well 11
Exciting 22 Communicative 10
Dimension II-A: Interpersonal Concern Concerned 45 Approachable 12
Caring 33 Interested 12
Available 27 Respectful 11
Friendly 18 Understanding 11
Accessible 17 Personable 10
Dimension II-B: Effective Motivation Helpful 41 Demanding 14
Encouraging 29 Patient 13
Challenging 28 Motivating 11
Fair 19
Commitment to Teaching Dedicated 35 Committed 19
General Positive Descriptors Effective 17 Outstanding 14
Excellent 17 Great 10
Note. (Lowman, 1995, p. 32)
Samples and Copeland The Universality of Good Teaching 178

is part of the scheme by which faculty members are collect data from non-engineering faculty from the
judged. Further, Wankat and Oreovicz (1993) add a authors’ universities. The details of the collection of the
new twist to the interpersonal rapport discussion by data are presented in the following paragraphs.
including the notion of a punishing type of relationship For over 10 years (1998-2010) workshops were
with students. Here, faculty members are “attacking, held to assist faculty in the development of better
sarcastic, disdainful, controlling, and unpredictable” teaching skills. Like the Excellence in Civil
(Wankat & Oreovicz, 1993, p. 4). They imply that Engineering Education (ExCEED) program, the
students who fear their professors get the job done but Essential Teaching Seminars (ETS), sponsored by the
do not retain the material and do not excel in the subject American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME),
area. As a group, those professors who act in a the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
punishing manner are perceived as unprofessional and (IEEE), and the American Institute of Chemical
receive the lowest evaluations among their peers. They Engineers (AIChE), and the privately sponsored
go on to add that those faculty members who Teaching the Teachers workshops focused on the
maximized the combination of intellectual excitement practice of teaching as outlined in the books by
and interpersonal rapport were highly regarded as Lowman (1995) and by Wankat and Oreovicz (1993),
teachers. This is a conclusion that just makes sense, but as well as the expertise of veteran teachers of varied
that needs to be stated so that faculty members can backgrounds. At the beginning of each workshop,
recognize the worth of the two-dimensional model. participants were asked to describe good teaching
More important is the fact that Bain (2004), Lowman practices via the following questions:
(1995), and Wankat and Oreovicz (1993) overlap in
their results and yet are from different disciplines: Bain • What is good teaching?
is a professor of history, Lowman is a professor of • How is it accomplished?
psychology, and Wankat and Oreovicz are professors of • Is good teaching necessary to have a
chemical engineering. This demonstrates that professors successful course?
from disparate disciplines writing about teaching agree • How is it evaluated?
that the descriptors tend to be the same.
• What are the results of good teaching?

Methodology
At each workshop, participants were divided into

groups to answer the questions, and their responses
In examining the characteristics of excellence in
were provided to the group where additional comments
teaching, Samples (2006) began an initial study by
are solicited. Thus, the responses were not anonymous
discussing teaching with engineering faculty members
and represent some “group think.”
at a series of workshops. The initial study was very
The authors’ universities are primarily teaching
revealing in that it identified many of the descriptors,
universities—one is a comprehensive university in
previously listed, as the basis from which these
Georgia with a student body of 7,000, and the other is a
engineering faculty members prepared their classes and
baccalaureate university in Pennsylvania with a student
taught them. Subsequent to these workshops,
body of 3,000. With this in mind, the participants at the
conference session discussions with more eclectic
authors’ universities were asked to respond to the same
groups of faculty from various disciplines who were
five questions via a survey instrument that included
interested in the topic of teaching excellence were very
their location and teaching discipline. Before
revealing: those interested in teaching excellence spoke
approaching the faculty for their input, Internal Review
about the subject using descriptors that were agreed
Board permission was obtained from both universities
upon by the workshop groups mentioned above. The
to execute the survey. A third party was asked to
question that arose for the researchers was the
collected the data and put it into a format that allowed
following: beyond those who would take the
review by the authors. There were 66 returned surveys
opportunity to attend a teaching workshop or
representing an approximately equal distribution of
conference, are faculty across disciplines using the
answers from each university. The responses came from
same language and thinking of teaching excellence in
faculty with a broad range of self-identified academic
the same way?
disciplines including natural science, education,
Thus, the researchers sought to explore teaching
mathematics, humanities, history, communication,
excellence communication by augmenting available
physics, business, chemistry, psychology, nursing,
workshop data with data taken from the faculty at the
biology, music, geography, and political science.
authors’ universities. The workshop data was processed
Additional responses would broaden the impact of the
immediately since it was available. This data was based
results; however, the sample is unbiased and, when
on the experience of engineering faculty from several
combined the engineering workshop responses,
fields. Simultaneously, preparations were made to
provides a broad coverage of colleges and universities
Samples and Copeland The Universality of Good Teaching 179

across the country. The results of the survey were then responses that did not fall within the descriptor
compiled to compare them with those from the last groupings and were eliminated. This was necessary to
eight workshops (approximately 25% of the total reduce confusion and to illustrate the preponderance of
participants) or 250 responses. answers that faculty provided that matched the
As can be imagined, there were hundreds of descriptors. In the final three sections, the answers had
answers to the five questions. Many of the answers no previous coding and were reported to demonstrate
were very long, especially those from the survey, while the thinking of the faculty. Taken as a group, the
those from the workshop participants were more responses to the five categories provide a blend that
pointed: one-word or short phrase answers. In the demonstrates the hypothesis.
paragraphs that follow, the most repeated answers will
be listed just as the descriptors were listed by Lowman Findings
(1995). The responses are listed below and are
accompanied by a brief analysis for questions 1, 3, 4, 5, What is Good Teaching?
with question number 2 being considered separately.
When addressing question 2, the method for The responses listed in Appendix A include some
accomplishing good teaching, the responses are listed that could be included in the other tables, but they are
under the “corresponding” category of the two- left in the summary of good teaching to highlight the
dimensional model in an effort to come full-circle in the opinions of the group. Many of the responses focus on
analysis of what makes good teaching. It is important to the “duties” of the teacher, some are responsibilities of
realize that the answers to some of the five questions the student, and others represent classroom tactics that
are more student-centered than Lowman portrays in his apply to both the teacher and the students. Careful
work. However, the descriptors that Lowman reports analysis identifies some of the adjectives previously
were provided by students, whereas the results reported: the adjectives are highlighted for easy
presented here are from the teacher’s perspective: the identification. Further analysis indicates that the teacher
“overlap” of answers will become obvious. There will must understand the students’ learning styles,
be two sets of answers for each question; one from the communicate expectations, motivate the students to
workshop groups and one from the combined survey perform through the use of various teaching styles and
results. Finally, there will be a brief discussion of the course flexibility, present the material in an organized
results and any surprises that were revealed. manner, make the course relevant, and demonstrate
methods that stimulate students to learn on their own,
Coding of Responses both in the course and throughout a lifetime of learning.
One response illustrates this well:
In Lowman’s (1995) book he relates the process
used for coding the responses that established the Good teaching is a creative interactional process
baseline from which this paper starts. For three years, between the teacher, the students, and the students
1989-1991, outstanding teacher nomination packets themselves. During this dialogue process, the
were examined by research assistants to independently students grasp new concepts, their relationships to
code all adjectives and descriptive phrases. Those one another and gain new insights to the reality of
adjectives and phrases that appeared more than 10 times the subject under study.
resulted in a group of 39 to be further analyzed.
The data collected from both the teaching Another sums good teaching into one sentence: “An
workshops and the survey were then reported using organized presentation of information that inspires and
differing methodologies. The answers to the question, motivates students to pursue further learning on their
“What is good teaching?” were coded using the 39 own and/or to apply the learning in new ways.” There
words used by the research assistants in the Lowman are elements of intellectual excitement and
example. The coded responses provided validation that interpersonal rapport throughout, with more being said
the faculty who were once students utilized the same about these dimensions in the “how accomplished”
descriptors when describing good teaching. These section. It is clear that the teacher must teach and the
descriptors are highlighted in the good teaching students must learn. The latter focus on student learning
response section. In the next section, the responses to is essential and must be addressed in the “evaluation”
the question, “How is it accomplished?” were divided and “results” of good teaching sections.
into responses that coded directly to Lowman’s (1995)
two-dimensional model that includes intellectual How is it Accomplished?
excitement and interpersonal rapport. These responses
clearly matched what Lowman called the “observer’s The simple answer is through a combination of the
description of teaching” (1995, p. 29). There were also two dimensions of Lowman’s (1995) model:
Samples and Copeland The Universality of Good Teaching 180

intellectual excitement and interpersonal rapport. The How is Good Teaching Evaluated?
responses in Appendix B reflect a good understanding
of the need for faculty to utilize both dimensions. Most The results shown in Appendix D indicate that
of the respondents focused on intellectual excitement, good teaching seems to be evaluated via two different
yet they often included elements of interpersonal methods: the evaluation of the teaching itself and the
rapport. For instance: “Expert knowledge of the evaluation of the student learning. Assessment or
teacher, confidence in the dialogue process and evaluation of teaching can be handled by a combination
exchange of ideas, thoughts, energy among the student of student and peer evaluations. Both were cited by the
and teacher.” It is refreshing that the faculty who workshop and survey participants as necessary to have
participated in the process identified these factors as effective evaluation of teaching. McKeachie (1999) in
important to accomplishing the mission of teaching. In Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research, and Theory for
the intellectual excitement column there are College and University Teachers relates that student
preparation, planning, technology, motivation, active, ratings are valid and can be used to improve classes and
organization, enthusiasm and experience: all descriptors aid in the development of faculty. Further, he indicates
that lead to inspiring students to learn and be interested that the peer evaluations are good, but their usefulness
in the subject. In the interpersonal rapport column there is overestimated due to the low number of visits. While
are student involvement, teamwork, interaction, good teachers do a fine job evaluating their peers, there
enthusiasm, communication, motivation, trust, is an issue of consistency that must be addressed: an
connectivity, and student responsibilities: adjectives issue that can only be resolved through more frequent
and phrases that lead to a relationship between teacher classroom visits. The remaining responses deal with the
and student. Teachers who use some number of these student’s ability to learn and his or her actual learning
ideas have the opportunity to excel as teachers and be in a classroom setting. The good teacher will evaluate
efficient in the classroom, thus providing more time for this to some degree, but the real proof of good teaching
other important efforts such as research and scholarly is retention of knowledge and the student’s ability to
production. apply the material in future academic and workplace
situations. These long- and short-term evaluations are
Is Good Teaching Necessary to Have a Successful the subject of pages of material on assessment
Course? techniques which will not be addressed here. It is
sufficient to say that some method must be established
The responses in Appendix C include “yes” and to evaluate student learning and to reward teachers who
“no.” Behind this list were thoughtful discussions that can foster this in their classes. Simply put by a survey
were based upon the ability of students and the participant, the evaluation process includes, “Student
meaning of “successful.” Some argued that their performance, feedback from student course evaluations,
students would learn successfully in the absence of instructor’s self-analysis, application of skills and
good teaching. Others maintained that less qualified concepts learned in other areas.”
students need good teaching to add value to their
education. Next was the discussion of what What are the Results of Good Teaching?
“successful” means, with definitions that range from
basic understanding of material to good student It is interesting and perhaps surprising that
evaluations that would satisfy university norms. The Appendix E includes the word “student” more often
intention of this question was to elicit this kind of than any of the other tables. There are, of course,
discussion. Success in the classroom should be rewards for faculty who teach well: good student
measured by the level of student learning and his or evaluations, respect from students and colleagues, and
her development. Is it necessary to have good recognition by the University. But in the vast majority
teaching? One response provided this outlook: “I of the circumstances represented here, the winner is the
believe good teaching is necessary to have a student. The student becomes enthused with the
successful course. If you understand your content area material, performs better in class and throughout life, is
but can’t communicate that knowledge to your happier, appreciates the field, is involved and confident,
students they more than likely won’t be inspired to does well on standardized exams, and can think
learn.” The authors agree with the results of the study independently. All of these comments reflect on the
and this answer: it helps in the process of making development and maturation of the student: the process
good students great ones, as well as making marginal from young student with a dream to a student fully
students solid performers. There is no data to support realizing her or his potential. This growth may occur
this contention except that the years of experience of naturally, but the value added by excellence in teaching
excellent teachers and pages of writings on the subject surely has some impact on the rate of development and
suggest that good teaching leads to student learning. level of success enjoyed by the students who experience
Samples and Copeland The Universality of Good Teaching 181

excellent teaching. A mathematics professor summed it numbers of graduates remain the same, perhaps they
up well: “Open-minded, educated consumers and will be more satisfied with their education than their
citizens who are not afraid to ask questions and are predecessors.
confident in their abilities to problem solve, including It is also noteworthy that a detailed study of the
finding additional information to help answer their importance of teaching quality was reported on by
realistic questions.” Brawner et al. (2002). In their study, they revealed that
To tie this discussion of the responses to the the importance of quality teaching was rated very
questions, it is valuable to return to the literature. highly by the respondents, 6.5 on a 7-point scale, and
Wankat and Oreovicz (1993) developed a compendium that colleagues, department heads, deans, and “top”
of learning principles that include: administrators rated the importance of quality teaching
as 5.21, 5.58, 5.14 and 5.10 respectively. Unfortunately,
1. Guide the learner their study indicated that the reward system for quality
2. Develop a structured hierarchy of content teaching at the institutions represented received a 3.71
3. Use images and visual learning on the 7-point scale. They conclude that, according to
4. Ensure that the student is active the respondents,
5. Require practice
6. Provide feedback the climate for teaching on their campuses was not
7. Have positive expectations of students particularly good in 1997 and worse in 1999. Most
8. Provide means for students to be challenged respondents expressed a belief that effective
yet successful teaching quality [i.e., teaching that sets high but
9. Individualize teaching style attainable standards, enables most students to meet
10. Make the class more cooperative or exceed the standards, and produces high levels
11. Ask thought provoking questions of satisfaction and self confidence in the students]
12. Be enthusiastic and demonstrate the joy of was very important to them . . . [and] decreasingly
learning important to their department heads, faculty
13. Encourage students to teach each other colleagues, dean, and top university administrator.
14. Care about what you are doing (Brawner et al., 2002, p. 8)
15. If possible, separate teaching from evaluation
(p. 6-7) Their data supports what was found in this study: that
the faculty members are thinking about teaching
These principles are considered the best practices: techniques and that there is a desire to fulfill the needs
“what works.” They are the basis of the book, Teaching of the students by providing “good” or quality teaching.
Engineering (Wankat & Oreovicz, 1993), a highly
regarded work that brings engineers into the classroom Conclusions
with excellent skills and provides the necessary tools to
assist in student learning. Upon reviewing this list, it is It is interesting when comparing the results of the
obvious that Wankat and Oreovicz (1993) subscribe to workshop participants and those who took part in the
Lowman’s (1995) two-dimensional model. It is also survey that they are functionally the same. As with the
apparent that the workshop and survey participants had authors of the reference books, the faculty members in
some idea about the requirements of good teaching. this study span a broad range of disciplines. Their
descriptors are very consistent, especially when
Summary defining the results of good teaching. In almost every
case, the focus of the instructor and his or her course is
It is both surprising and refreshing to note that the engagement in student learning and success. This
responses to the five questions from teachers with complies directly with Postelthwait’s (1972) assertion:
experience ranging from zero to 25 years result in data “Education is more than an information dispensing
similar to that presented by the experts from many process. It requires a comradeship of sharing and
disciplines, as well as ultimately from the students exchanging of experiences and excitement that grows
whose data was used to formulate Lowman’s (1995) from common interests and hopes between teacher and
work. It is more refreshing to note that the responses student” (p. 1).
came from faculty, many of whom have experience There is reason to suspect that many of the
ranging from zero to five years—the target for those in respondents in both the workshops and surveys are
the engineering sample. With such an aware faculty good teachers since they would be the ones who
cohort, many of whom are new to teaching, it is might volunteer to discuss what good teaching really
possible that the years ahead will see better results in is. Good teaching can be achieved by the average
the quality and quantity of graduates. And even if the professor. There are some simple keys that will help
Samples and Copeland The Universality of Good Teaching 182

in accomplishing the mission: plan, prepare, practice, Lowman, J. (1995). Mastering the techniques of
organize, communicate, challenge, motivate, and teaching (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
lead the students to learning. The two-dimensional Bass.
model is easy to use and appears to be in use because McKeachie, W. J. (1999). Teaching tips: Strategies,
the newer faculty members are aware of it. Or, there research, and theory for college and university
is an excellent series of training courses that all of teachers (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
these faculty have attended and which has made Postelthwait, S. D. (1972). Students are a lot like
them aware of the methods. Frankly, it is suspected people! University Vision, 8, 1-7.
that many faculty have just learned by watching Ramaekers, S., van Keulen, H., Kremer, W., Pilot, A.,
teachers (perhaps their own) teach—deciding what & van Beukelen, P. (2011). Effective teaching in
made sense, what felt right—and vowing to be that case-based education: Patterns in teacher behavior
kind of teacher. By attending workshops, their ideas and their impact on the students’ clinical problem
about teaching are reinforced by the views of their solving and learning. International Journal of
peers. Thus we have identified good teaching Teaching and Learning in Higher Education,
through a peer identification process. Perhaps, all 23(3), 303-313. Retrieved from
colleges should gather their faculty to discuss this http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/pdf/IJTLHE1030.pdf
very issue since it has great impact on the students, Samples, J. W. (2006). Good teaching: As identified by
even if the university reward system does not your peers. Proceedings of the American Society
recognize teaching as important. Most faculty for Engineering Education Annual Conference
members must teach, and doing it well can be Proceedings, Chicago, IL. Retrieved from
fulfilling and lead to efficiencies across the spectrum http://search.asee.org/search/fetch?url=file%3A%2
of teaching, research, and service. F%2Flocalhost%2FE%3A%2Fsearch%2Fconferen
ce%2F12%2F2006Full1361.pdf
References Skilling, H. H. (1969). Do you teach? Views on college
teaching. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and
Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Winston.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wankat, P. C., & Oreovicz, F. S. (1993). Teaching
Brawner, C. E., Felder, R. M., Allen, R. H., & Brent, R. engineering. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
(2002). How important is effective teaching to ____________________________
engineering faculty and administrators?
Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for JERRY W. SAMPLES holds a PhD in mechanical
Engineering Education Annual Conference and engineering from Oklahoma State University. Dr.
Exposition, Washington, DC. Retrieved from Samples served at the United States Military Academy
http://home.roadrunner.com/~rtec/Papers/ASEE02 12 years before assuming the position of Director of
_faculty.pdf the Engineering Technology Division at the
Elbow, P. (1986). Embracing contraries: Explorations University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown in 1996. After a
in learning and teaching. New York, NY: Oxford 5-year period as the Vice President for Academic and
University Press. Student Affairs he returned to the Engineering
Estes, A. C., & Ressler, S. J. (2003). Teaching assessment: Technology Division. He is a Distinguished Fellow of
How do you do it? Proceedings of the 2003 American the International Society for Teaching and Learning,
Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference receiving that honor in 2006. In 2008, he received the
and Exposition, Nashville, TN. Retrieved from American Society for Engineering Education National
http://search.asee.org/search/fetch?url=file%3A%2 Outstanding Teaching Award.
F%2Flocalhost%2FE%3A%2Fsearch%2Fconferen
ce%2F27%2FAC%25202003Paper227.pdf SUSAN E. COPELAND holds a PhD in English
Gaonkar, R. (2003). Teaching lessons from from The Catholic University of America. She is
engineering feedback model for new educators. Associate Professor of English at Clayton State
Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for University. In 2006 she was named a Governor’s
Engineering Education Annual Conference and Teaching Fellow and Permanent Member of the
Exposition, Nashville, TN. Retrieved from Georgia Board of Regents’ Institute of Higher
http://search.asee.org/search/fetch?url=file%3A%2 Education. As of 2007 she is a Distinguished Fellow
F%2Flocalhost%2FE%3A%2Fsearch%2Fconferen of the International Society for Exploring Teaching
ce%2F27%2FAC%25202003Paper721.pdf and Learning.
Samples and Copeland The Universality of Good Teaching 183

Appendix A
Responses to “What is Good Teaching?”

Workshop responses Survey responses
Achieves student learning Strategies that engage students
Shows applicability/connection to other courses Performing art to engage, captivate and move the
Student satisfaction at some level (90%) audience
Constant assessment of learning Interactive and stimulation – involves expertise in
Students are engaged and challenged Interactive subject matter
classes Engages the student – knowledge of discipline
All students legitimately receive “A” Enable students to make “discoveries”
Actively engage students in learning Puts students at the center of the enterprise
Motivates students Stimulating student interest
Cognizant of learning styles Creative, interactional process – a relationship
Facilitate and motivate Effectively communicating information
Addresses different learning styles Expectation for students
Students understand the basics Current, engaged, listening, responsive,
Engenders retention of knowledge (or students) approachable
Demonstrations Creating an environment conducive to learning
Instill a desire to learn Motivate students to WANT to learn
Transmit a message Preserve the past, reveal the present, create the future
Continuous and organized presentation Thought process Good teaching communicates and challenges
Like other things, you know it when you see it Motivate and excite
Relevant Excite the, challenge assumptions, create curiosity
Promotes self learning Active engagement
Identify and address conceptual difficulties Models learning
Engages students Organizing to maximize learning
Identify student learning styles Clear and concise communication
Good organization and planning Clear and concise information transfer
Attract and keep student’s attention Engages – makes them interested in learning
Communicate course content to students Inspire student to learn
Achieve course outcomes Stimulates intellectual curiosity – challenging and
Accurate, technically correct demanding
Passionate about teaching We CARE
Adapts to audience Organized presentation – inspires and motivates
Good facilitation Firm knowledge base, then communicate it
Flexibility in explaining information Student’s knowledge acquisition
Energy Environment that stimulates and motivates learning
Mentoring and respectful relationship Based on continual assessment of the process
Engage and motivate the students Excites, accountability with feedback
Cohesive and logical presentations Involves organization, thorough preparation and
Effective communication with students enthusiastic modeling
Engaging students in the process
Presenting in a logical reasonable way
Clear and organized presentations
Clear and fair-minded assessment
Connecting with the students
Developing the student’s ability to learn
Stimulating the mind of the learner
Note. Bold text = key points in responses.
Samples and Copeland The Universality of Good Teaching 184

Appendix B
Responses to “How is it Accomplished?”

Response focus Workshop responses Survey responses
Intellectual Excitement Planning Interest in subject matter
In-class assessment People learn differently – application
Student motivation Careful preparation of materials, clear
Convey student responsibilities presentation
Integrate technology Relevant course content
Adaptation of material presented to students Complete sensory experience
learning style Involve the students in the learning
Involve the senses Clear learning outcomes
Engender student self-discovery process Vary teaching techniques
Feedback on student knowledge base Prepared for class
Focus on basics Active in discipline
Student understanding of concepts Good relevant examples
Preparation – logical organization of Storytelling
content Listen and Learn
Be active – keep moving Place yourself in students shoes and then
Hands-on experience to motivate students help them
Vary the learning tools Material current and relevant
Experience (teachers Intellectual honesty
Get organized Enthusiasm
Motivate students – get them excited about Higher level thinking and metacognition
material Critical thinking practicum
Challenging tests Active and energetic delivery and evaluation
Appropriate out of class assignments Advanced and current knowledge
Practical – relevant examples Regular assessment and feedback
Good role model
Inform real life practice with theory
Socratic method
Interpersonal Rapport Student involvement Concern for students
Flexibility/standards Shares a large dose of themselves with
Tailor teaching to the student’s level students
Enforce discipline/standards Advising and mentoring
Teamwork (students and teachers) Concern for academic well-being of students
Stay connected with students Dialogue process, exchange ideas, energy
Understanding learning styles exchange with students
Win students’ trust Cares
Practice (students) Enthusiastic about course
Adapt to student learning styles Expectations, responsibility, clear policies
Make it fun Students involved in class
Interact with students Face-to-face encounters
Enthusiasm – entertaining skills Student responsibilities outlined
Effective communication Practice with the instructor present
Engage and motive students Personal exchanges
Variety of presentation methods Show passion
Preparation – Create clear expectations for Positive and personal attitude
students Students actively participate with positive
Project interest and enthusiasm reinforcement
Mutual respect
Engaged in the learning process
Practice
Desire to learn and meet with teacher often
Samples and Copeland The Universality of Good Teaching 185

Appendix C
Responses to “Is Good Teaching Necessary to Have a Successful Course?”

Workshop responses Survey responses
To meet student expectations I believe so
Communicate and connect YES!
Assist in interpreting the text Of course! Good teaching is necessary to have a good
Define success then outcome assessment to measure class even though some can learn without good
success teaching.
Meet university expectations No. But lower half of class will have trouble
What percentages of students succeed? Students can learn alone but do better with good
Overcome distractions teaching
Bridge between students and knowledge Ultimately yes
Address learning styles Yes
Yes! Absolutely
Assist in understanding the textbook/material Yes, No, Yes
Increase retention of material Of course
Accomplish accreditation outcomes Not necessarily
Only part of the time On an individual student level, not necessarily
Value added Yes and No
Needed for optimal learning If the students are successful, then the course is
To make class more enjoyable successful
Good teaching accompanies success It is a relatively necessary element
Depends on student’s backgrounds Good teaching plays a large part in success in the
Good techniques assist learning classroom
Increases desire to learn In general, yes
Depends on the definition of successful Will increase the probability of success
Students gain knowledge and skills Yes, but that is only half the equation. Students must
Success based on everyone accomplishing the work and invest energy to make the class good
objectives Yes
To motivate students Depends on what successful means. If passing is ok
Job security then not necessary – higher level learning will require
Quality graduates more effort by the teacher and the students
Better students learn in spite of teaching Maybe yes, Depends – students can teach themselves, sometimes
maybe no Most of the time, but some will learn even in a bad
Cover difficult material effectively environment
Motivate students and create enthusiasm Maintain Yes, the student must be stimulated to learn
attention In some disciplines like math and science – bad
Basis for student learning teaching could do some real damage
Adapt to class environment Yes, need to create the environment for learning
Attract and retain students No, certain learning outcomes do not require the
To reach students with academic challenges teacher
Umm . . . not necessarily and good teaching does not
ensure success